I stumbled upon this article and the author's prediction that Chip Kelly would have success as a coach in the NFL interested me. I am a fan of the offense they run over in Oregon and am very interested to see Chip Kelly in the NFL.

I was wondering what anyone on here thought about Chip Kelly's NFL prospects. Personally, I think he is the top coach in college football right now and he definitely could have success coaching in the NFL if he has the right team. I think he could be the right coach to get the Carolina Panthers offense back on track and he could be a good coach for a team with a young quarterback from a spread offense.

I stumbled upon this article and the author's prediction that Chip Kelly would have success as a coach in the NFL interested me. I am a fan of the offense they run over in Oregon and am very interested to see Chip Kelly in the NFL.

I was wondering what anyone on here thought about Chip Kelly's NFL prospects. Personally, I think he is the top coach in college football right now and he definitely could have success coaching in the NFL if he has the right team. I think he could be the right coach to get the Carolina Panthers offense back on track and he could be a good coach for a team with a young quarterback from a spread offense.

I think he'll be coaching in the NFL next season. Right before the NCAA announces the ban hammer on Oregon for buying players.

I like your idea of him in Carolina. Newton in his offense would be interesting. Especially with those running backs. I think Newton is better suited for an offense like that instead of what they are currently running in Carolina.

The problem that I have with Kelly in the NFL are that his teams have displayed a complete and utter lack of defense. Defense is necessary to win in the NFL. I think that most of that is a lack of defensive talent at Oregon, but I'm not entirely sold that is the only reason.

I think he'll be coaching in the NFL next season. Right before the NCAA announces the ban hammer on Oregon for buying players.

I like your idea of him in Carolina. Newton in his offense would be interesting. Especially with those running backs. I think Newton is better suited for an offense like that instead of what they are currently running in Carolina.

The problem that I have with Kelly in the NFL are that his teams have displayed a complete and utter lack of defense. Defense is necessary to win in the NFL. I think that most of that is a lack of defensive talent at Oregon, but I'm not entirely sold that is the only reason.

Completely disagree. When its 42-7 in the middle of the 2nd quarter and he unloads his bench, the other team will start to score. USC game is a perfect example. USC ended up scoring quite a bit, but that game was not even remotely close, and looked closer after SC got a garbage TD in the final few minutes of the game.

Where he will harm his defense in the NFL is by having them on the field for so long. The offense is on the field for only ~4 minutes a possession. They rank 85th in time of possession and barely broke 25 minutes a game last year. Doing a little better this year

Completely disagree. When its 42-7 in the middle of the 2nd quarter and he unloads his bench, the other team will start to score. USC game is a perfect example. USC ended up scoring quite a bit, but that game was not even remotely close, and looked closer after SC got a garbage TD in the final few minutes of the game.

Where he will harm his defense in the NFL is by having them on the field for so long. The offense is on the field for only ~4 minutes a possession. They rank 85th in time of possession and barely broke 25 minutes a game last year. Doing a little better this year

Yeah, a quick scoring offense gives the defense little rest. But the defense can rest more on 3 and outs.

Most of the Pac 12 does not play defense. USC fielded the last great Pac12 defense and that was five years ago.

I can't wait to see the NC this year. I'm thinking it will be Oregon and KSU. I really think that will be a fun matchup.

But any combo of Oregon, KSU, ND, and Bama would be fun. I don't believe that there are any great teams this year, which is kinda cool, I guess.

I don't really know if Kelly to the NFL is a great idea. His offense could have an initially favorably result but over time NFL defensive coordinators will figure it out. I think he would run an offense similar to what the Redskins are running now so it wouldn't be all that revolutionary and teams would have an idea of what to gameplan for. Kelly seems like a good guy and coach but the whole thing reminds me of Spurrier to the Redskins - a coach with an offensive system built for the college game. However I do not think Kelly has the Spurrier sized ego.

I think he'll be coaching in the NFL next season. Right before the NCAA announces the ban hammer on Oregon for buying players.

I like your idea of him in Carolina. Newton in his offense would be interesting. Especially with those running backs. I think Newton is better suited for an offense like that instead of what they are currently running in Carolina.

The problem that I have with Kelly in the NFL are that his teams have displayed a complete and utter lack of defense. Defense is necessary to win in the NFL. I think that most of that is a lack of defensive talent at Oregon, but I'm not entirely sold that is the only reason.

I think he probably gets out if the NCAA is going to throw the book at Oregon, otherwise he will probably stay after getting some NFL interviews and a nice pay bump from the University. If he does get to the NFL, I seriously doubt he would try to just plug and play his college offense. He and everyone else know that it probably wouldn't be viable in the NFL. He would incorporate elements of it though into a more standard offense.

I would love to see him try and bring the fast break O to the NFL. But in the end of the day I don't know if it would work. Could you see Ware coming free because of a miss block on the O Line? He would kill whatever QB Kelly had on his team.

If Oregon wins the Championship this year (which I think they will) he's gone. I personally think he'll be very good in the NFL. He won't run the same offense. He will likely tweak it a bit to fit into the NFL. But what I'm most excited to see is him adding some balls to NFL coaching. Kelly goes for two, does onside kicks, goes for it on fourth down. CUrrent NFL coaches punt when they have a 4th-and-one from their opponent's 42-yard line.

Buffalo, New York, Cleveland, Jacksonville, Kansas City, Philadelphia, Carolina, and Dallas could all have openings (plus some possible surprises like Washington or New Orleans). I doubt he would go to Buffalo or Cleveland, but Carolina with Newton, big money in Dallas, or even the Jets with Tebow could be interesting for him. Hell, Jacksonville having the top pick could interest him.

Brilliant letting one of Scott Pioli's henchmen have his own team to ruin. One of the premier GM jobs in the NFL and it gets handed to a stupid **** who makes three facepalm moves for every good one. Awesome. Just like handing a new Mercedes to a 16 year old girl who's already been in three wrecks.

To anybody claiming that NFL teams will "figure out" his offense, I have to say I expect Chip Kelly to expand his playbook if he gets to the NFL. He will have to and he will have the time to do so in training camp that he doesn't in college. The same could be said of any college coach.

To those of you who don't think zone-read will consistently work, I have a spoiler for you: It can. I think it is obvious that zone running plays work in the NFL. Adding a read element into the running play is only beneficial. It can mess with a team's gap assignments and it can help the QB effectively block defenders without actually having to throw a block. There is nothing gimmicky about the offense Chip Kelly runs in Oregon. It is no easier to figure out and game plan for than any "pro-style" offense.

I wonder if anybody has a rebuttal. Is there anything about zone-read based offenses that is easier to "figure out" than any other offense. I would think that the post-snap options inherent in a zone-read system could only lead to more potential for creativity. Chip Kelly has shown to be a creative play caller, even if his playbook is fairly simple, and shouldn't be discredited for being uncreative. Any offense can be game planned for.

To those of you saying Chip Kelly's offense would be "figured out" (I know that isn't everybody), how do you think defenses will specifically game-plan for it? I am not saying that his offense can't fail, but I think if the talent is there, it will succeed. He just needs a QB who is at least a little bit mobile and a good offensive line capable of holding its blocks.

To everybody claiming that NFL teams will "figure out" his offense, I have to say I expect Chip Kelly to expand his playbook if he gets to the NFL. He will have to and he will have the time to do so in training camp that he doesn't in college. The same could be said of any college coach.

To those of you who don't think zone-read will consistently work, I have a spoiler for you: It can. I think it is obvious that zone running plays work in the NFL. Adding a read element into the running play is only beneficial. It can mess with a team's gap assignments and it can help the QB effectively block defenders without actually having to throw a block. There is nothing gimmicky about the offense Chip Kelly runs in Oregon. It is no easier to figure out and game plan for than any "pro-style" offense.

I wonder if anybody has a rebuttal. Is there anything about zone-read based offenses that is easier to "figure out" than any other offense. I would think that the post-snap options inherent in a zone-read system could only lead to more potential for creativity. Chip Kelly has shown to be a creative play caller, even if his playbook is fairly simple, and shouldn't be discredited for being uncreative. Any offense can be game planned for.

To those of you saying Chip Kelly's offense would be "figured out" (I know that isn't everybody), how do you think defenses will specifically game-plan for it? I am not saying that his offense can't fail, but I think if the talent is there, it will succeed.

Yeah, strategically, I totally agree with you. I don't think people have tried to run it because they don't want their QBs getting killed. Almost all running QBs get destroyed during a season.

Unless they are built like Tebow (I know, that is a passing triple option he ran in college), they are going to get broken by the huge, fast, and strong NFL defenders hitting them on every play.

You simply can't let the QB get exposed like that. If he managed to find a QB that wouldn't break down after getting hit a ton but still had great athleticism (I'm looking at you Newton and Pryor) then I think it would flourish in the NFL. If his QB can't run, it really takes away the advantage of his offense.

Yeah, strategically, I totally agree with you. I don't think people have tried to run it because they don't want their QBs getting killed. Almost all running QBs get destroyed during a season.

Unless they are built like Tebow (I know, that is a passing triple option he ran in college), they are going to get broken by the huge, fast, and strong NFL defenders hitting them on every play.

You simply can't let the QB get exposed like that. If he managed to find a QB that wouldn't break down after getting hit a ton but still had great athleticism (I'm looking at you Newton and Pryor) then I think it would flourish in the NFL. If his QB can't run, it really takes away the advantage of his offense.

That is a fair point and probably the main reason zone-read has been slow to take off in the NFL. NFL defenses are keen to put a pounding on any QBs and NFL defenses will get a few hits on zone-read QBs over the stretch of a game. At the college level, Chip Kelly's QBs don't take many hits. Mariota takes fewer hits than the vast majority of college QBs, but that could change.

Still, the Panthers showed with Cam Newton last year that you can run zone read without your QB taking a pounding, even though Cam Newton was a very proficient runner. Most zone-read plays in Chip Kelly's offense are designed so the QB doesn't have to run, just present the threat to do so.

I do agree with you that the offense would be served by playing a mobile QB who could take a hit, such as Cam Newton. NFL defenses are faster than college ones and the balance between offense and defense in the NFL is less skewed towards offense as it is in the PAC-12.

FYI, I had already posted a link to that article in the first post of the thread. That article was actually the impetus for my creating the thread in the 1st place.

That is a fair point and probably the main reason zone-read has been slow to take off in the NFL. NFL defenses are keen to put a pounding on any QBs and NFL defenses will get a few hits on zone-read QBs over the stretch of a game. At the college level, Chip Kelly's QBs don't take many hits. Mariota takes fewer hits than the vast majority of college QBs, but that could change.

Still, the Panthers showed with Cam Newton last year that you can run zone read without your QB taking a pounding, even though Cam Newton was a very proficient runner. Most zone-read plays in Chip Kelly's offense are designed so the QB doesn't have to run, just present the threat to do so.

I do agree with you that the offense would be served by playing a mobile QB who could take a hit, such as Cam Newton. NFL defenses are faster than college ones and the balance between offense and defense in the NFL is less skewed towards offense as it is in the PAC-12.

FYI, I had already posted a link to that article in the first post of the thread. That article was actually the impetus for my creating the thread in the 1st place.

I'm a ******* ret4rd. I can't believe that I relinked the thing I read from you. I had it bookmarked for later reading. Seriously, I'm ret4rded.

The offense isn't that much different from a NFL system for me. Its actually pretty close to what the Skins are running right now. The base plays are actual zone blocking staples, the option stuff is as Greg Cosell calls it window dressing. Chip doesn't need a pure running QB. He just needs a guy who can move well. The pure pocket passer is pretty much dead anyway. Every QB taken in the first round last two years are plus athletes atleast with physical specimens like Cam, Locker, RG-3, Tannehill. All of them would fit Chip's system.

The bigger issues are for me can they do what they do in practice right now? Run plays frenetically and do the coaching and correcting in the film room. And can chip manage million dollar egos. Most of his recruits aren't 5 star kids, they are athletic guys that they handle well because their S&C staff are incredible. Can he handle the star players is my bigger question?

I hope if he does take a job its one of those cities where there is no media glare. Carolina or Jacksonville and not Philly or Jets where the media scrutiny will be overwhelming. I do think he can succeed in the NFL.

To anybody claiming that NFL teams will "figure out" his offense, I have to say I expect Chip Kelly to expand his playbook if he gets to the NFL. He will have to and he will have the time to do so in training camp that he doesn't in college. The same could be said of any college coach.

To those of you who don't think zone-read will consistently work, I have a spoiler for you: It can. I think it is obvious that zone running plays work in the NFL. Adding a read element into the running play is only beneficial. It can mess with a team's gap assignments and it can help the QB effectively block defenders without actually having to throw a block. There is nothing gimmicky about the offense Chip Kelly runs in Oregon. It is no easier to figure out and game plan for than any "pro-style" offense.

I wonder if anybody has a rebuttal. Is there anything about zone-read based offenses that is easier to "figure out" than any other offense. I would think that the post-snap options inherent in a zone-read system could only lead to more potential for creativity. Chip Kelly has shown to be a creative play caller, even if his playbook is fairly simple, and shouldn't be discredited for being uncreative. Any offense can be game planned for.

To those of you saying Chip Kelly's offense would be "figured out" (I know that isn't everybody), how do you think defenses will specifically game-plan for it? I am not saying that his offense can't fail, but I think if the talent is there, it will succeed. He just needs a QB who is at least a little bit mobile and a good offensive line capable of holding its blocks.

One of the main reasons the zone read isn't a staple in the NFL and never will be is because you can't leave the EMOL's unblocked in the NFL. You can't leave the JPP's, and Jared Allen's unblocked.

Secondly, I don't see football trending towards the fast paced, no huddle type offenses because I think we've reached the tipping point with it in terms of offenses having an unfair advantage over defenses.

It's like when the NBA changed the rules because 148-140 games in the NBA became unwatchable.

A lot of coaches have complained a lot regarding how we've essentially come to the point of offenses having an unfair advantage, and some of the complaints have come from coaches that were pioneers of the no huddle, and subscribe to fast paced offense.

For example, I heard Bob Stoops complaining about a game where the offense attempted about a 50 yard bomb which resulted in an incomplete pass.... the receiver proceeded to just step off the field 50 yards downfield where the pass was incomplete, and his replacement stepped on the field while the DB's were still trying to run all the way back and get in position while the offense was ready to run another play.

When no huddle coaches are complaining about unfair advantages, it's time to get things back under control.

Zone read does not and will not work consistently in the NFL. Ends and 3-4 backers are way to fast to try and read. They can play the QB and the RB. Obviously it will work from time to time because they will just guess from time to time.

The give part of the offense and the passing game should work and we are more likely to see the offense that we saw with Darron Thomas compared to Masoli and now with Mariota. Thomas was not a great runner so they went more with base gives in their running game and the intermediate passing game.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49erNation85

I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.

Also Kelly's offense is predicated on being very uptempo, quick scoring strikes and catching the defense out of position and exploiting those weaknesses. This leaves the defense on the field for a long period of time. In the NFL these defenses are going to be gassed if they are on the field for extended periods of time. Bigger, Stronger O-lines and running backs will exploit that a lot easier than at the college level.

Zone read does not and will not work consistently in the NFL. Ends and 3-4 backers are way to fast to try and read. They can play the QB and the RB. Obviously it will work from time to time because they will just guess from time to time.

The give part of the offense and the passing game should work and we are more likely to see the offense that we saw with Darron Thomas compared to Masoli and now with Mariota. Thomas was not a great runner so they went more with base gives in their running game and the intermediate passing game.

Carolina's offense last year very effectively used zone-read principles. They have struggled this year after deciding to ditch some of the zone-read plays in favor of a more traditional offense.

Team's don't need to read outside backers. They can just as easily read defensive tackles. If they don't want to leave JPP unblocked, they don't have to. Plus, If a play is designed right, the player who is being read can't simply "play both the QB and the RB." They won't be in the same place.

Plus, any NFL team Kelly coaches will have a better passer at QB than he has at Oregon who should be able to make a defense pay in play-action. Ball fakes out of shotgun formations are the most effective play-action fakes, so if an NFL team can establish the ability to run the ball out of the shotgun, the passing game should open up.

And to address a point made by JHL6719, I doubt the NFL is going to change any rules to slow down the game because a few college coaches whined about facing uptempo offenses. Maybe they will, but until they do, I doubt the NFL is going to create any laws that force teams to play slowly.

I don't mean to just argue one side of the issue, but I do feel that zone-read based running games can work in the NFL with the right personnel, especially for a team that can pass the ball well. And playing primarily out of the shotgun can help a team pass well.

Carolina's offense last year very effectively used zone-read principles. They have struggled this year after deciding to ditch some of the zone-read plays in favor of a more traditional offense.

Team's don't need to read outside backers. They can just as easily read defensive tackles. If they don't want to leave JPP unblocked, they don't have to. Plus, If a play is designed right, the player who is being read can't simply "play both the QB and the RB." They won't be in the same place.

Plus, any NFL team Kelly coaches will have a better passer at QB than he has at Oregon who should be able to make a defense pay in play-action. Ball fakes out of shotgun formations are the most effective play-action fakes, so if an NFL team can establish the ability to run the ball out of the shotgun, the passing game should open up.

And to address a point made by JHL6719, I doubt the NFL is going to change any rules to slow down the game because a few college coaches whined about facing uptempo offenses. Maybe they will, but until they do, I doubt the NFL is going to create any laws that force teams to play slowly.

I don't mean to just argue one side of the issue, but I do feel that zone-read based running games can work in the NFL with the right personnel, especially for a team that can pass the ball well. And playing primarily out of the shotgun can help a team pass well.

Well you are correct in saying that you don't have to leave the EMOL unblocked if you don't want to, you can also leave the DT unblocked... which Oregon chooses to do sometimes. I don't see any other teams doing that.

The concept is simple... you'd rather leave a big DT unblocked because he's typically slower, and a lesser athlete than a DE or OLB. You'd rather have that big DT freed up and trying to make plays in space as opposed to an EMOL who can chase down plays from behind.

All sports will adjust when you reach a tipping point and one side has an unfair advantage over the other. It's always been that way. Baseball lowered the pitchers mound when they realized that pitchers had an unfair advantage. The NFL changed the rules regarding the way DB's could play receivers...etc.

Football is sport where innovation drives more innovation, and the innovation in football has always began at the high school/collegiate levels. The NFL just copies this innovation. Thus why the NFL is referred to as a "Copycat league".

With the rules currently slanted towards offense in the NFL, particularly the passing game, governing bodies will always make the adjustment to account for what they consider an unfair advantage.

Well you are correct in saying that you don't have to leave the EMOL unblocked if you don't want to, you can also leave the DT unblocked... which Oregon chooses to do sometimes. I don't see any other teams doing that.

The concept is simple... you'd rather leave a big DT unblocked because he's typically slower, and a lesser athlete than a DE or OLB. You'd rather have that big DT freed up and trying to make plays in space as opposed to an EMOL who can chase down plays from behind.

All sports will adjust when you reach a tipping point and one side has an unfair advantage over the other. It's always been that way. Baseball lowered the pitchers mound when they realized that pitchers had an unfair advantage. The NFL changed the rules regarding the way DB's could play receivers...etc.

Football is sport where innovation drives more innovation, and the innovation in football has always began at the high school/collegiate levels. The NFL just copies this innovation. Thus why the NFL is referred to as a "Copycat league".

With the rules currently slanted towards offense in the NFL, particularly the passing game, governing bodies will always make the adjustment to account for what they consider an unfair advantage.

Agreed with what you said up until this point. The NFL thrives off of the ignorance of casual fans. I would say that more than 90% of this board are more than simply casual fans and you will find that the majority of this board would agree with your statement that the rules are slanted towards the offensive side.

However casual fans don't want to see 9-6 defensive slug fests. They want to see shootouts. 48-38 is way more enjoyable for a casual fan than a game with no TDs.

It's the same in all sports though. To use a nice obscure reference that most people here won't get, in cricket there have been a few different types of game created 20/20 etc. The thinking is that the general public want to see as much action in as short a time possible - more actin per play/ball faced. When a Test Match lasts 5 days you can understand why people who aren't fans of the game would be turned off as it can seem drawn out and boring. However you ask any cricket purist and they think that 20/20 is ruining the game.

The same thing is happening in football. Casual fans who sit in bars drinking don't want to see a RB take the ball up the middle for 4 ypc 3 times in a row. The real excitement comes in passing.

True football fans however like to see competition. You don't have to be a football purist who loves 3 yards and a cloud of dust etc to be against what is happening in the NFL at the minute. Even guys who are into the innovation of the league will look at the game today and agree it isn't right. However it isn't going to change and for one reason - $$$

Being an eagles fan I would prefer he didnt get hired there, but could be interesting to watch.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by 49erNation85

I wouldn't be sir prized if he passed McCoy on the depth chart. I think he might have a better arm and accurate arm then him from the highlights I thought. He also got some wheels too help us prepare for QB's as Wilson , RG3 and other runners etc.